What's good people? The NCAA tournament is finally upon us, and, as always, the tournament is a chance for individuals to shine and establish themselves as future NBA greats. At the top of everyone's draft board are Greg Oden and Kevin Durant, two guys whose teams can get blown out in the first round but they'll still be the top two picks taken. The question is, who should go first? Now, I know this topic as been beaten to death, but the consensus seems to be that Oden is the "safer" pick. The reason I'm writing about this, despite the fact that we've heard a million opinions on the subject, is because I can't understand that opinion.
Let me preface this rant with this statement: Greg Oden will be the first pick in the NBA Draft. The only way it doesn't happen is in the rare event that a team with an actually decent front line wins the lottery. Looking at the teams near the bottom of the barrel, I really can only see the Bucks (with a serviceable Andrew Bogut) passing on Oden and maybe the Grizzlies because they're so offensively inept, but that's about it. He's not the "safe" pick from a basketball standpoint, but he's the safe pick for a GM's job security. The media has been hyping this kid for years, just like Lebron. No matter how great Durant turns out, no one will be held accountable for taking Oden ahead of him because of the press he's received. But if you pass on the "next great center" that has been hyped as a savior for American big men for the last 5 years, and he turns out to be better than Durant, sports media will eat you alive for failing to pay attention to their foresight. And nowadays, when sports media can impact/intimidate GMs from doing anything because of the scrutiny they'd receive, it's almost a lock that no one can pass on Oden.
As for that "consensus" thing. A lot of educated basketball writers have said Oden is the safer pick in terms of NBA production, and that's why I'm so confused. Do people watch NBA basketball any more? Times have changed. The NBA is a perimeter dominated league, and the high pick-and-roll has become the blueprint to success. Every good team runs it (Phoenix, Dallas, Detroit, Cleveland, Spurs, Miami, etc. - in fact, I don't think there was a single half court play run in yesterday's classic Mavs/Suns game where they didn't use it), and we're in a league now where a wannabe John Stockton (maybe that's a bit harsh) can win back-to-back MVPs. Looking at last year's MVP race, Elton Brand and Tim Duncan were the only two post players who even got votes. Granted, part of that is because of a lack of quality big men, but part of it has to be attributed to the perimeter-orientation of the game today. There's no denying this is a more athletic NBA than 10 years ago and schemes (both offensive and defensive) are different than they used to be, and that's where this whole Oden thing bothers me.
There is a school of thought out there that Greg Oden should go first simply because he's a center, which, along with point guard, is the most important position in the NBA. Is that really the case nowadays? I watched the Rockets get destroyed a few nights ago by the Suns because Yao was completely out of place. The speed and quickness of the Suns prevented him from ever getting comfortable, and he never impacted the game whatsoever. Granted, not every team plays as fast as the Suns, but on the same token, no center in the league today is as dominant as Yao. Even if you take that as an extreme case, there are still other situations which prove my point: some talented big men look completely lost in the NBA. Take Andrew Bynum for example. He's a nice young player with tremendous upside, but I've seen him come into games where he just looks like he belongs in another era. There's no one he can match up with defensively because he's not quick enough, and if he's not dominating offensively, Phil takes him out. Same goes for Chris Kaman, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, and a slew of other big men who can't keep up with the game, forcing their coach to adjust and use a quicker lineup. I'm not comparing Oden to these guys, but the point is it's tough for a center in the league, and in my mind, there are 3 types of centers that can make it in today's game:
1) Centers with a dynamic offensive arsenal that that makes teams pay for playing small-ball (i.e. Yao Ming, motivated Shaq)
2) Centers who are essentially converted 4's that play center in small lineups, with the speed and agility to keep up with the pace of the current NBA game (i.e. Amare Stoudemire, Jermaine O'Neal)
3) Centers who dominate defensively (particularly in help defense, since post defense means nothing now that no one actually posts up) and control the boards on both ends of the floor (i.e. Ben Wallace the past couple years, Dwight Howard).
A big man has to do at least one of those 3 things to even get playing time in today's NBA... otherwise, coaches go with a small lineup with no true center while the big man watches from the bench. Looking at Oden's game, right now he's pretty mediocre in all 3 categories. I know he has a hurt wrist, but I've seen him in high school, and I know he's not much of an offensive player, relying mainly on dunks and put backs. He's not particularly quick and doesn't run the floor the way converted power forwards do, and he's even slower than some of the more athletic big men (Hakeem, Robinson, etc.) of the past. Defensively, he's great (although it'll be interesting to see how he helps out against NBA guys who drive with authority and the intent to dunk), but he's not that good of a rebounder, often poorly positioning himself, and he doesn't have the ability or reflexes to adjust. He gets his rebounds basically by being taller and jumping higher than everyone, which won't fly in the NBA.
Looking at Durant, he fits today's game better. Talk about the high pick-and-roll dominating the league... Durant can either be the guy with the ball (a la McGrady) or the guy setting the screen (a la Dirk), either of which is a nightmare for opposing defenders. If he were in the league today, he'd be one of the 3 most complete scorers already (behind Kobe and possibly Dirk), as he possess three-point range, above average post moves, the ability to beat defenders off the dribble, and an absolutely LETHAL pull up jumper from mid range that would be one of the top 5 moves in the NBA already (I can't stress how effective it is, you just have to see it for yourself). He's a great rebounder, with a surprisingly quick leap, long arms, great timing, and the ability to snag the ball out of position. He can run the floor with the best forwards in the NBA. Defensively, he's a talented shot blocker and plays passing lanes deceptively well (especially in zones and presses) because of his length, but I admit his man-to-man D needs improvement.
The biggest X-factor that makes Durant the safer choice with the top pick is his attitude. He's got what you want in a franchise guy, playing with intensity and inspiring teammates to play hard because they believe Durant can win any game for them when he's on. He's consistently clutch, and genuinely wants the ball in big situations, even if his coach wants him to reset. As the season progressed, he began to impose his will in every game. Earlier in the year, Durant let questionable play calling and inexperienced point guard play get in the way of his dominance. There was even a debate at one point as to who should be college player of the year, with Alando Tucker and Nick Fazekas playing incredibly well. Durant silenced all of that as the season went on. When asked about the race in an interview, Durant said the kid from Wisconsin had been great. The comment reminded me of every time Tom Brady was asked about Peyton Manning when the Pats were dominant, and he'd always say the right thing to the media (praise Manning's skills, say it was a "tough game" even if it wasn't, etc.) but in the back of his mind we all could tell he was really thinking "I own that hick." Durant is a nice kid, and I'm sure his praise for Tucker was genuine, but I knew when I saw him say it that he didn't really think Tucker belongs in the same class as him. It's almost like Durant took the debate personally, and ever since he's been a one man wrecking crew, similar to how people in the early 90's actually had the balls to compare Clyde Drexler with Michael Jordan before the '92 finals ended that debate once and for all because Michael's competative nature took over.
Oden, on the other hand, is a docile big man who wasn't even the locker room leader of his AAU squad. Even this year, it's clear that Mike Conley is the guy players rally around. He says he wants to be an impact player and an all-time great, but his personality says otherwise. As much as I do like his game, you need a certain attitude to be a true franchise player, which is what you're looking for with the top pick in the draft (and I don't care what people say, you cannot learn this, you either have it or you don't, period). I feel Oden will be more like Vince Carter: a talented guy who puts up great numbers but is more comfortable with someone else being the leader. Wherever Durant goes, it'll be his team from day 1.
Don't get me wrong, I really like Oden. He's guaranteed to be a good center (along the lines of 17 and 9 with a couple blocks), but you don't pass on Kevin Durant for that. He has to either a) improve his rebounding and become Olaujuwon on D, shutting down anything within 8 feet from the basket or b) improve offensively so teams can't play small against him. I wouldn't consider either of those to be a lock, given Oden's history and personality. He has to work on his game considerably to be a dominant center in today's league. I'm not questioning his ceiling, or whether or not he should be the top pick, but how is this the safe pick over a guy who's guaranteed to be a top 10 scorer for years with a style that perfectly fits the NBA?
As for potential, that's an impossible call at this point, but let me ask this question: who's had a better career, Tim Duncan of Shaquille O'Neal? Looking at their accomplishments, they're very similar: perennial All-NBA First teamers, 3 finals MVPs, Shaq has one more ring, Duncan has one more regular season MVP... it's a tough call on paper. But here's the difference: coaches gameplan to match up with Tim Duncan, but teams completely adjusted their season plans to match up with Shaq. I'm not trying to compare Durant to Duncan or Oden to Shaq, but the idea is the same. If they both realize their potential, they'll be very similar on paper, battling for MVPs for years to come and being fixtures on the All-NBA teams. The difference is Oden could completely change the game. Even though we've never seen a guy like Durant, teams will defend him the same way they defend Dirk or McGrady. If Oden develops a solid offensive game and is dominant defensively, he can actually alter the entire dynamic of the leagues. Teams will have to stack up on 7'0 bodies just to match up with him, similar to Shaq's best years with the Lakers. He can single-handedly put an end to the small-ball concept by being such a dominating mismatch, forcing teams to use bigger lineups and slow down the pace of the game. So if I had to choose who had the higher upside, I'd take Oden for that reason... his upside in terms of impact, not talent, is higher than Durant's. But that scenario seems highly unlikely, so if I had the first pick in the draft in June, I'd take Durant, the more established guy who's game is better prepared for the league... in other words, the safer pick. I hope that all made sense.
On to a couple other thoughts about the NBA Draft:
- This kind of feels like last season's NFL Fantasy Draft, where any where in the top 3 is great, but beyond that, you're kind of screwed. In this case, getting Oden or Durant makes you a winner, but what the heck do you do with the 3rd pick? Personally, I think Joakim Noah is the 3rd best player available, but are teams looking for a guy like that with the 3rd pick? He's the perfect team player: a great defender who runs the floor like a cheetah, has a high basketball IQ, will be one of the 2 or 3 best passing forwards in the league, plays with a lot of energy, and is a vocal leader and great locker room guy. But he doesn't project into a dominant player, which is what most teams are looking for with the 3rd pick. Can you build a championship team around Noah? People seem high on Brandan Wright, and I don't understand why. Out of all the great freshmen, he seems to be the only one who thinks he's too good for college basketball. He has a clear work ethic problem, and in my mind he hasn't gotten any better since his junior year of high school. His jump shot hasn't improved and neither has his physique, and that tells me he's just not spending enough time on the court and in the weight room to be great. That's not a good sign. Again, attitude is something that you can't learn... Wright is a slacker, period, who will probably lose all love for the game when he gets a major contract (think Tim Thomas). He relies on natural athleticism and nothing more. If Chase Buddinger comes out, maybe he gets into the conversation, but no mock draft has him ranked so I assume they have reason to believe he'll be back in Arizona... but for the love of God, no one should take Brandan Wright 3rd. He's Josh McRoberts (I'll get to him shortly), just 2.5 shades darker.
- Alando Tucker is projected to go in the late first round. Hmm... didn't we go down this road before? A guy who leads a team to an overachieving season, is the conference player of the year in a major conference, an All-American with great leadership skills and intangibles, but because he's a forward with questionable shooting range, size, and limited upside, he falls to the end of the first round? Yeah, I remember this, it was like 4 years ago, and I'm sure there are a ton of GMs who wish they could have a mulligan after passing on Josh Howard. They're gonna feel the same way about Alando Tucker.
- Now that the Lakers (my only non-Philly sports allegiance) don't have a real chance to go deep in the playffs, I almost want them to tank the rest of the season, get to the end of the lottery, and nab Acie Law, because he will unjustifiably be available. He's the second coming of Chauncey Billups: a well-built point guard with the moxie (yeah, I said moxie, wanna fight about it?) to take any shot at any time. I get chills thinking of him and Kobe in the backcourt, and the only reason I'm not outright praying for the Lakers to free-fall is the fact that Mitch Kupchak is too inept to take Law even if he had the chance. Someone's gonna get great player about 6 picks later than he should've gone. I really think he's a top 5 player in this draft.
- I'm glad Josh McRoberts came back for another year. People actually had the audacity to project him as a top 5 pick in last year's draft, but the truth is out. The kid sucks. A 6'10 power forward with hops, but he's softer than a marshamallow, probably bench presses a cool 150 pounds, and has no perimeter game to play 3 in the NBA. He's Chris Anderson with a higher basketball IQ and nothing more. On second thought, it was wrong for me to compare Wright to McRoberts. No respectable baller should be compared to McRoberts, so I retract that statement. Still though, don't take Wright third.
- Guys with the highest bust potential: Thaddeus Young - freak athlete, kind of like Shawn Marion with a less effective jumper... can he survive if he ends up with a half court team? Will he ever commit to defense?; Yi Jianlian - the most athletic foreign center ever, so athletic he could actually play the wing in the NBA, but people also fell in love with Darko's athleticism... needless to say, all foriegners have a high bust potential because they come from a compltetely different game; Al Horford - is he the next Carlos Boozer or Wayne Simien? Undersized power forwards are dangerous in this league. This feels like a good time to poit out that neither of those guys were in the top 25 in their draft, so why does an undersized power forward who wasn't as effective as either of them project into the top 10 in the deepest draft in recent memory? I can't understand it; Spencer Hawes - interesting big man, but may be too slow to adjust like some other guys I've mentioned. All of these guys will probably be top 10-15 picks (assuming they come out)
- People I think will do better than expected: Tyler Hansbrough - I know he's undersized, but he's projected to go fairly late in the first round, which is too low for me. His free throw percentage and shooting form lead me to believe he has a 17 footer in his arsenal that he hasn't needed to break out because he's so dominant down low in college, reminiscent of Udonis Haslem (although I think Hansbrough is a better rebounder and locker room guy); Corey Brewer - I know he's projected to go high, but I really like him. He's a 6'8, long, super athlete who actually commits to defense. I don't think I've ever seen it before. He'll be asked to guard the best perimeter player on the other team (any position from 1-3) and I think he'll be able to handle it. He could be a more athletic Bruce Bowen, which is something you really need in today's game; Jared Dudley - after watching the Lakers collapse without Luke Walton, I realized there will always be a place for fundamentally sound, intelligent, good-locker room guys with a team-first attitude, no matter how unathletic they are. Dudley will be an important role player for some very good teams down the road; Rudy Fernandez - I've only seen clips of him, but he's 6'6 with a very quick release and moves well. He could be a taller Rip. Nick Fazekas - another guy who just understands the game. He's crafty enough to score down low despite not being that athletic, has good touch in his mid-range game, and is the best rebounder in the country in terms of getting position, Gotta love him.
Well, that's all I got for now. I know it was pretty long, but I'm an NBA junkie and can write books about the draft if you get me started. If you're one of those people who thinks this is all irrelevant because the draft isn't for months, well, you're no one of consequence. Enjoy March Madness.
No comments:
Post a Comment